Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    Yes we did, but he's regularly denied that in this thread by the "haters". They talk about him stealing rebounds...and never give credit for him leading the team there. They say he's only played well because of Paul George. They say he isn't a good defender. They claim he cannot shoot but he shot quite respectably from 3 last year. They discount his team leading assists claiming he shared the ball only to rack up stats. They discount his team leading FG% and claim he got it all around the rim, when that's not true. They claim he's been figured out this year...that teams know to guard his right hand. They begrudgingly admit he has talent but he's not a good player. If he isn't a good player, how did he play "good" last year?
    A lot of that is up for debate, just because someone has ab opposing opinion doesn't mean they are wrong. He played well last year because he was in a system that exemplified his strengths, minimized his weaknesses, and surrounded him with players that did both also.

    As it stands right now, Lance had one pretty good season with everything in place to put him in a place to succeed. Its up to him to raise his game and make sure he proves that he wasn't a one yr wonder who had everything fall into the right place.

    The fact that he's getting worse as the season has progressed doesn't bodr well for a turnaround. But its certainly possible. Nobody's denied thar

    Comment


    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

      Lance is worse than Brian Roberts. Don't think a different environment can fix Lance's jump shot. Every time he shoots one, he is giving the middle finger to his teammates. Nobody wants a player that calls his own number when he can't shoot. They only thing that will fix Lance is once he learns that he doesn't need to score points.
      Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

      Comment


      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
        It was under Larry Brown. I normally associate terrible coaching with Zeke, so my bad.

        The point is, Larry Brown didn't support Jalen Rose and he virtually rotted on the bench for 3 years....regressing significantly from year 2 to year 3. Jalen was about the same age as Lance and while Jalen didn't play this bad he didn't play remotely close to his capabilities because of the coach and the fact the coach showed little or no confidence in him. That leads to attitude issues and let's just say Coach Clifford and Lance do not get along.
        He only played one year under Larry Brown, the infamous Season We Do Not Discuss. From 97-98 to 99-2000 he was playing under Larry Bird. You know, the guy whose opinion on talent is permanent and immutable?
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

          Lance is not rotting on the bench. He is getting regular minutes. I have watched a few hornets games. Obviously Lance is very talented, but sometimes he doesn't understand how to best utilize his abilities. Many trips down the court he would be out top, juking and jiving, going nowhere, then pass, or get open for his own shot, which he missed many times. His terrible shooting percentages make him a liability. Obvioulsy some is confidence as his almost all of his stats are severely down, as are his minutes. Whatever the motive for his problems, he has to figure it out.

          Comment


          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

            some of you dudes are like those models on the catwalk you see digging their heels in but then stuff goes bad and they try to fight through it but then they just end up with two sprained ankles

            Comment


            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

              Thinking about Lance at the All Star Break, amazing how much difference a year makes. Last year he felt snubbed for being left off the East All-Star team. This year he can't stay in his own team's starting lineup. I doubt anyone considers him an All Star this year.

              My hope is that like last year's swoon for the Pacers, arguably initiated (in part) by Lance, he can have the same destructive effect on the locker room of his current team and help the Pacers secure one of the last spots for a playoff. With only 2 games separating 6 teams for the 7th and 8th playoff spot, all we need are a couple of bad streaks by the other cellar dwellars and a couple of modest win streaks.

              Comment


              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                I was told I was going to have to wait until Lance started playing for Clifford, under the tutelage of the GOAT, in a better offensive system, with a better post player, with a better point guard with a team that, let's face it, was better than the second-half pacers of last season for Lance to show us we should have ponied up extra cash for him.

                Now apparently, I have to wait until he happens to find himself in a position where a team has a specific need for a specific skill set to be proved that we are missing him?

                I don't know about you, but it sounds like a role player to me. A very talented role player, sure, but not a potential superstar.
                Time for a new sig.

                Comment


                • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                  Lance averaged around 13 6 and 4 in the regular season and playoffs last year. Those aren't amazing numbers for a shooting guard. Sure, Lance was a fine player, a very important piece in the Pacers run, but he wasn't spectacular. It's not like he went from phenom to crap. He went from a very solid player with All Star potential to worthless.

                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                    I gave up posting on this thread, but thought I'd stop by just to say I'm shocked by Lance this year. I thought he played well last year, and at times I considered him the second best player on the team (especially when Hibbert's head imploded and West looked like he didn't care.) But the few times I've seen Lance play this year he looks lost. The swagger he had last year that made him either look very good and/or out of control seems to have evaporated. When I've seen him play this year he looks more like an 8th man, and an incredibly over-paid one at that. I'm eating crow cause I thought he'd be a good addition to Charlotte, and instead I now find myself thinking that the Pacers, somehow, dodged a bullet.

                    Obviously times can change and who knows what we'll think a couple years down the line, but my attitude has gone from one of regret at his leaving to relief he did.
                    Danger Zone

                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                      I am a bonafide Lance hater who at one point last year considered Lance my favorite guy to watch on the entire team. HOORAY


                      I don't think Lance is a bad basketball player, but he is very dependent on his situation in order for his game to work. My point has been and continues to be, that Lance made a dumb decision. I said it LITERALLY the day the rumor came out that Lance was meeting with Jordan that he was not a good fit for the team in Charlotte and the contract he took just further solidified what an idiotic decision it was.

                      24 year olds with their whole careers ahead of them shouldn't have to take a team option in year 3 to get the contract number they want. The fact Lance's team let that go through is by far the most mind boggling part of the entire fiasco.
                      Last edited by Trader Joe; 02-12-2015, 02:57 PM.


                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        I am a bonafide Lance hater who at one point last year considered Lance my favorite guy to watch on the entire team. HOORAY
                        If ya ain't with us, yer 'gainst us!

                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                          Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                          I was told I was going to have to wait until Lance started playing for Clifford, under the tutelage of the GOAT, in a better offensive system, with a better post player, with a better point guard with a team that, let's face it, was better than the second-half pacers of last season for Lance to show us we should have ponied up extra cash for him.

                          Now apparently, I have to wait until he happens to find himself in a position where a team has a specific need for a specific skill set to be proved that we are missing him?

                          I don't know about you, but it sounds like a role player to me. A very talented role player, sure, but not a potential superstar.
                          I would probably said it nicer, by this is a pretty good explanation. Lance has some skills that a team can use, but he is not a guy that you can plug in just anywhere. He is a role player.

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                            Also shout out to everyone who said the immortal Steve Clifford would unlock Lance's true stardom that the evil gatekeeper Frank Vogel had failed to unlock. You guys were the real MVPs of this whole event.


                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                              This situation is so easy to summarize. Lance thought that he was bigger than the Pacers and that he could go be Magic Johnson somewhere else without vets in his way. Confidence is good and is why he became a contributor on a good Pacers team, but he crossed that dangerous line where overconfidence and arrogance can become detrimental. In the case of his young career, it could be fatal. A year ago, he was one of the more talked about young players in the league. Now he is making about as much noise as a mouse fart in the wind.

                              Had he lost a bit of the stubbornness, met the vets on this team halfway, appreciated Vogel and his patience, not been advised by complete idiots who were in over their head, and taken the superior offer from the Legend.....then he could have accomplished some really nice things in this league. But this is a true case of karma. He acted like a bonehead and his career is suffering miserably.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                                Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                                I would probably said it nicer, by this is a pretty good explanation. Lance has some skills that a team can use, but he is not a guy that you can plug in just anywhere. He is a role player.
                                I wouldn't say that he's a role Player.....cuz that implies that he's really good at filling one specific role on the Team.

                                There's a difference between being a Role Player that is brought in to fill a specific role on the Team ( defensive specialist, 3pt shooter, rebounder ) and what ( at worst ) he can turn out to be....a bench Player that can help facilitate and run the offense ( maybe that's his role ) or ( if the correct situation exists on a Team ) a Starter that can be the 2nd ball handler on the Team ( which is shown that he is capable of and what he basically did here last year ).
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X